(When) Will Linux Pass Apple On The Desktop? 1316
EisPick writes "A column posted today on Slate ponders projections that Linux PCs will pass Apple in desktop market share next year. Will Linux do to OS X what it already has done to Tru64, Irix, HP/UX, AIX and Solaris and emerge as the only viable competitor to Windows on the desktop?"
Do you really think... (Score:5, Informative)
As long as Jobs continues to raise up religious zealots to the cause, Apple will never really be dead.
Also of note, who says that Jobs can't encorporate all the advantages Linux has into his OS.
Re:Will Linux do to OS X what it already has... (Score:5, Informative)
wait a minute (Score:2, Informative)
The "new mac os" isn't a GUI for Unix. It may have BSD underpinnings, but that has fuckall to do with Unix, unless you happen to be posting from 1985.
It's not just a kernel and a gui in a box, either. It's a system. Like FreeBSD, sort of. A collection of software more than just an OS.
What did it do??? (Score:5, Informative)
Would anyone mind telling me exactly what Linux "already has done" to the above OS?
Tru64 and HP/UX were both doomed as soon as the Compaq/HP merger happened, and I don't think things would be much different even if Linux wasn't around.
How about SGI? It doesn't seem to be an example of where Linux beat Irix, it seems to be an example of where ia32 systems beat out propritary systems in price/performance.
As for AIX, IBM may be doing a lot of talking about how Linux will eventually replace AIX, but it isn't happening now (nor do I suspect it will ever happen) so I don't think that's much of an example.
I'm not sure why Solaris is on this list... Sun is still going strong, and Solaris is doing just fine.
Huh? (Score:1, Informative)
From the 'article' (Score:4, Informative)
So some of the lower-end boxes, that can be easily load-balanced, are being set up using Linux rather than Solaris / AIX / HP-UX.
What precisely is the 'Windows portion' of the server market, anyway?
Certainly not big-assed application servers that are the meat and drink of the big Unix vendors - in fact the 'Windows portion' of the server market looks tailor made for Linux replacement.
IBM probably isn't too bothered - the ability to run multiple Linux images on their big iron is a major selling point.
Bah - Slate is a M$ owned site, anyway.
Maybe in the very short-term... (Score:4, Informative)
On the other hand, I see a very bright future for Apple. This article couldn't be more timely as today we Apple loyalists heard some of the best news since OS X came out: the shackles of Motorola have been cast off for pure IBM goodness. With the G5 and OS X, I think Apple is unstoppable. Apple already sports the nicest laptops, and now the desktop offerings are equally awe inspiring. One of the biggest complaints about Apple has been that the are overpriced and underpowered. With the G5 fixing the power problem, I think the economy and IBM will help with the price. IBM reportedly can produce the 970 much cheaper than Motorola could produce the G4, and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple tried to pass on these savings in the process of trying to carve out more than their traditional niche. Also, if/when the economy gets back into swing, more people will have the money and be willing to go for a pricier Mac if they believe it to be a superior machine.
Re:I wish Linux luck... (Score:5, Informative)
there is nothing entry level about any of the G5's. If there was, they'd be in a new iMac, not Power Mac.
Maybe not in America... (Score:3, Informative)
Well Said ! (Score:1, Informative)
I mainly use Win2k on a server spec'd computer (Dual Athlon MP, Corsair memory with ECC enabled, Tyan mobo, Antec Power Supply, etc.) and have very few problems with Windows.
I'm neither a fan of Intel, AMD, Microsoft or Apple, but I have to admit the new Apple computers are jaw dropping.
I also like appliances that WORK 24/7. I turned on my DSC alarm system 4 years ago and it hasn't missed a beat. I put Sun and IBM mainframes in the same reliable category as my alarm, but these are servers. The new Apples might get there aswell for a few hundred thousand dollars less.
Re:Will Linux do to OS X what it already has... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:An equivalent argument... (Score:2, Informative)
Actually you can buy an Amiga One [compamiga.com] with a G3 or G4 now, and run Mac on Linux.
Of course, now we need a G5 model.
Re:Will Linux do to OS X what it already has... (Score:5, Informative)
Well, maybe I'm just a twisted, freakish excuse for a human being, but that's exactly what I did. And I know a couple of other people who did, too. (Before the Switch campaign started.)
Sure, it didn't hurt that Apple makes good-quality hardware, but "OS X niftiness" was the deciding factor.
Re:No (Score:5, Informative)
Linux is for when you're young, poor, and in need of serious computing horsepower. OS X is for when you've got money in the bank and you don't want to have to deal with the Linux hassle.
Will Linux eventually get its usability act together and challenged OS X on its own turf? Maybe, but on its way there, Linux would much more quickly gut Windows dominance and that's a result I can live with.
apple is it's own worst enemy (Score:3, Informative)
Forced Upgrades (Score:3, Informative)
I've got boxes running 10.1 Server around here because no one "forced" me to run 10.2 Server.
Likewise I know my mother's 233 iMac and another 333 iMac I support are running plainjane 10.1 and it runs well.
I'll get 10.3 for my machines, but not becuase Steve Jobs is pointing a CD to my head screaming "Forced Upgrade biaaatchhhh! Now shell for Panther!" but because I want the features.
Re:Will Linux do to OS X what it already has... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:No (Score:5, Informative)
I dual boot not because I want to, but because I am addicted to games. Give me games and I'll toss my Windows Disk out of the window.
Re:Will Linux do to OS X what it already has... (Score:5, Informative)
Google Zeitgeist [google.com] is a great way to take a look at those figures over time at a pretty universal location.
For may '03 google lists linux at 1% and mac at 3%. Linux zealots may look at that and say well 2% is miniscule with the rate of growth that won't take long, etc. But go back and look at june 2001 zeitgeist and you'll see similar numbers. Linux with 1% and Mac with 4%
The conclusion i draw from those numbers is that linux desktop use isnt growing at any significant rate at all, and the only danger Apple has in getting passed on the desktop is if they lose a dramatic amount of market share to windows.
Re: Give into Temptation! (Score:2, Informative)
That hasn't been true for years. Microsoft invested $150 Mil in non-voting stock, more or less when Jobs returned to the fold, and they sold it a couple of years later at a profit.
Re:apple is it's own worst enemy (Score:5, Informative)
OS X 10.0.4 came with machine.
OS X 10.1.0 payed $20
10.1.1-10.1.5 or so: free
10.2 payed $129
10.2.1-10.2.6 free
10.3 will pay $129
10.3.1-10.3.x probably free.
As for the Win32 price, you're comparing OS X to Win Home. OS X is more comparable to Win Pro, at a $199 pricetag. And the fact is that the difference between 10.2 and 10.3 is going to be as significant as that between 2K and XP.
And then there's the family license for OS X: $199. Comparable license cost for Windows XP Pro: $994 or so.
Re:No (Score:3, Informative)
A bottom line (and I mean BOTTOM. radeon VE, onboard sound, 256 mb ram, 40gb hard drive) Xeon capable Dell, *starts* at $1,048. If you got yours refurb, it's not a fair comparison. Look at the Apple refurbs if you're going to do that.
A truly comparable, new Dell runs $2,509, which is much less reasonable, especially given that the Xeon is a 32-bit processor.
Re:The reverse I would think (Score:2, Informative)
I guess it all comes down to how well you really know computers, doesn't it?
Re:Will Linux do to OS X what it already has... (Score:4, Informative)
Clearly you have never used Mac OS X.
Although Apple does have an advantage in that the majority of the hardware they've got to support is hardware designed and manufactured by Apple, it still doesn't change the fact that you simply *don't* have to fuck with drivers in OS X.
At least, I never have. (OS X 10.2 / PowerBook G4 12")
Re:$500 machine...? (Score:2, Informative)
Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
1GHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM
Expandable to 8GB SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive
Three PCI-X Slots
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem
so how does that $630 athlon box compare? give me a break. sure, you save $3000 (if you get an apple 17"LCD with that G5). but a single athlon compared to a dual G5? let alone the other features like serial ata, pci-x, airport extreme, superdrive, etc.
Nit Pick (Score:3, Informative)
Okay, I agree with most of what you said, but this is just silly.
First, "DLL Hell" is reserved for DLL conflict, in which different programs require different versions of a library but the system can't cope; not "requires a lot of libraries."
Second, the fact they require a lot of libraries is *good*. The goal of Object Oriented Programming is code-reuse; this is considered a Good Thing. Now, libraries aren't necessarily OO in nature, but the fact that all these apps use a core set of functionality is really A Good Thing. This *doesn't* lead to bloat; it leads to faster development with less bugs, as the library becomes well-tested and well-debugged.
Slowness? Yes, since Linux seems to be a bit slow in dynamic binding. Troube compiling? Possibly, if you download the source and compile yourself. But, desktop users shouldn't be doing this! They should be doing "apt-get install gnumeric gnucash kword" or whatever. Or clicking friendly checkboxes and a button that says, "Download and Install."
Or whatever.
The rest of your points are valid. Not debilitating, I think, but valid. Unfortunately, because of the way politics works (and the computer industry is driven more by ad-hoc business politics than by worth and value, that's for fucking god-damned sure), I think OS-X doesn't stand much of a chance against MS-Windows.
But then again, Linux doesn't stand much of a chance, either.
Yet.
Re:Yellowdog Linux (Score:2, Informative)
I downloaded it for free. Burned the CDs. Rebooted. Ran the installer. Except for some grief from my monitor (which even OSX is having some trouble with - I think I picked the wrong monitor), everything was set up automagically, no sweat. Sound, web, video, everything.
This story is getting old (Score:3, Informative)
It's time to stop spreading the FUD. Anyone who can setup and use Windows can setup a Mandrake or Red Hat box. It is only difficult for some people stuck in a Windows world who couldn't imagine anything else. The completely clueless will learn either just as easily. Admittedly even former MS zealots (myself included) can find it not too difficult to setup a Linux box.
Re:No (Score:3, Informative)
Did you get it from Dell's refurb site or someone in Round Rock who has been sneaking machines out the door? The lowest price SMP capable machine that I've priced out from Dell is a Precision 450n with the minimum amount of RAM, IDE hard drives, cheapest video card, linux, etc. and it came out to be a little over $1300. To get the DVD burner & something equivalent to the low end G5, one had to get XP (DVD burners are supported under linux, ???), and it was about $1740 ... not much cheaper than the Apple machine.
(When) Will Linux+OSX Pass Windows On The Desktop? (Score:2, Informative)
Maybe it's just me, but I see Linux and OS X competing for the title of Next Killer OS, while simultaneously complementing each other -- both are Unix, but they differ/compete on price, ease-of-use, available applications, etc. (Apple's stylish and now superior-performance hardware is also a big carrot for going with Mac). Anyway, I don't see how this competition can be a bad thing for either, but it could spell trouble for Microsoft:
Of the Windows user who will switch it seems likely that more will choose Linux than Mac, especially as KDE and GNOME become friendlier, but some will choose Mac, so it really seems that Apple and Linux only gain.
Re:The reverse I would think (Score:4, Informative)
At the bottom right corner of the page, it says a little about the *nix side of OS X. One thing is that the X11 client will be built into Panther. I don't know about being able to use other WMs though.
To kinda respond to the grandparent post, I still don't think many novices will venture into X11 apps without some sort of package manager.
Re:No (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Who needs apps, my Gnome desktop r0x0rz (Score:4, Informative)
According to IBM quite a few actually. Well it may suck but it is still better than the Alternatives (Exchange/Groupwise)
Acrobat is only available for Windows and Mac. Acrobat Reader(!) is available for Unix.
We use Framemaker exclusively for all our Technical Documentation our Books, Master Thesises etc. IMHO Word does suck big for such documents. With word you will never get a document which adheres even the basic typografic principles and it is therefore unusable for anything but the simplest tasks.
Re:About your sig... (Score:1, Informative)